Rajput kings and their battles

Recently, I stumbled upon a nice blog about Rajput kings and their heroic wars against the Muslim invaders. Read it and enjoy the battle stories!

http://hindurajput.blogspot.com/

Arms of the kshatriya always support and sustain the people like (a father his) son.
A kshatriya is, for this reason, honoured by all, in all situations.
There is nothing in all the three worlds, which is beyond (the reach of) bravery.
kshatriya sustains all, and all depend upon the brave.
 – Mahabharata, Shanti Parva, 99. 17-18)

This shows how stupid Gandhi was to have misinterpreted Hindu scriptures and come up with this assinine ideology of “non-violence at all costs.” There is a reason why all Hindu gods are armed. Righteous violence against the wicked is the lifeblood of Hindu tradition. I don’t know what Gandhi was smoking to have come up with his tripe. I strongly suspect British role in promoting his leadership among the Hindus to defang them.

About these ads

109 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

109 responses to “Rajput kings and their battles

  1. S

    I have nothing but respect for the Rajputs of Rajasthan, but I think that they have been over-hyped. Kshatriyas were a part of society in every state, and Raja Dahir Sen, who faced the first islamic invasion was a Kshatriya as well. I want to point out that it were the Kshatriyas of Maharashtra (the Marathas) and the newly founded Kshatriya order of Sikhism that broke the back of the Mughal empire. While the Rajputs were brave warriors, they only fought defensive campaigns and did not liberate India from the Mughals.

    • sanjaychoudhry

      The war of Hindus against marauding Islamic hordes was fought in various stages, with each link in the chain equally important. No sacrifice went in vain, because Hindus still carry their foreskins. The war lost its direction because of Gandhi and he managed to dissipate the Hindu reolutionary fervour into some mindless utopian non-violence practised by the victims.

      The war against Islam started with the Hindu kings of Afghanistan (the Hindu Shahis) who kept thwarting Muslim armies for 300 years. Then the Raja Dahir of Sindh fought to death with them.

      The Rajputs fought with the Delhi Sultanate and Akbar for 400 years, preventing them from making inroads into South India and not allowing them a moment’s peace.

      The Marathas and then Sikhs finished the work started by the Afghan Hindus and the Rajputs.

      Read Sitaram Goel’s excellent book (available online) here about how the Hindu kings fought the early Muslim invaders:

      “Heroic Hindu Resistance to Muslim Invaders.”

      http://voiceofdharma.org/books/hhrmi/

      • Yam Chand

        Sanjayji,
        Nice post. In my opinion fall of Hindusthan to aggressors from Afghanistan had some reasons:

        1. Newcomers aggressors had better weaponery, like firearms against traditional Hundu weapons.

        2. Hindusthan was a very hot climate making people lazy and compared to aggressors who came from very cold and harsh climate and they had more stamina to fight.

        3. Disunity among Rajput kings.

        4. Casteism, which ordered only Rajputs to fight. Brahmins, Vaishyas and Shudras hardly thought war against those foreigner ruler concerned them.

    • rohit

      raja dahir ws nt a kshatriya he ws a brahmin,rajputs r good but overhyped,rajputs wer gr8 fighters but nt as they r taken to be,they only fought defensive campaigns and never attacked muslim basterds,infact if they wud hav been united muslims cud hav nevr evr crossed india’s border,non violence is gandhian bullshit no body hurt india more than tht basterd gandhi,i ws present then iw ud hav killed him much b4 gr8 patriot nathuram godse did bloody pseudo secularist gandhi

      • prajyotsingh bisen

        there is not perfect historical proof that raja dhir was a bramhin or a kshatriya…….

      • prajyotsingh bisen

        not only post dependance history but after indian dependance also RAJPUTS have won most of GALLANTRY award in war of 1962,65,71,99
        including 7 Param vir chakra (indias highest bravery award) and many victoria cross on international war site………………..

    • Anonymous

      mr s u want to say that muslims firstly faced by marathas , mr one thing u should know that marathas is in southern part of india and rajasthan is in north west of india , so u mean to say that they directly faced with marathas, mr s, muslims were invaid from north west direction of india not from sea ways.

      • S

        Anonymous, I am visiting this site after a long time, so I don’t know whether I will receive a reply from you, but I’ll clarify things anyway. What I said, and what is a fact, that the Rajputs of Rajasthan, while their valour and sacrifices cannot be denied, were mostly limited to their own princely kingdoms and states. They fought defensive battles, not offensive ones. The modern India that we are living in was liberated by the Sikhs and the Marathas. That’s all there is to it. You can confirm this by reading history.

    • Mohit Agarwal

      My friends..Most of the Rajput kings had bloated egos and zero vision with the Sole exception of Raja Bhoj, Lalitaditya, Bappa Rawal and Shahi Kings. They were willing to take up battles only to defend their own kingdoms or to satisfy their egos which used to get slighted at the drop of a hat. They were too busy with luxurious life to bother about modernization of army/warfare techniques. The reason Indian Kings lost time and again was they never bothered about creating an efficient fighting force. Most of the fighting force was drawn from common man who were drafted at the time of war with little or no training. Fighting skills like Archery etc were domains of Kshatriyas and others were zealously kept away this domain. It is this narrow mindedness that resulted in enslavement of India for next 800 years

      • @Mohit,

        You are uninformed.
        The Hindu Rajput kings had hundreds of battle victories against
        the Turks. There are inscriptions to prove it, by the hundreds.

        The Rajputs largely succeeded in eliminating the Turks in much
        of Northern India by the 1350 AD.

      • jacky singh

        sale tere naam ke pichhe khan nahi oor tu musla nahi kyu ki rajput the , eehsan faramosh .. apne baap dada se puchh jo saar zukake baat karte the rajputo ke samne

        • rajan singh

          rajputs were brave bt not united thats why they were defeated bajirav peshva won all the fights in his life

          • rajan singh

            rajputs were brave bt not united thats why they were defeated bajirav p

            eshva won all the fights in his life varna muslims ki kya aukat rajputs ko hara de face to face shivaji ne muslims ki wat lagai thi

      • prajyotsingh bisen

        If you think rajput kings had zero vision then you should read about RANA KUMBHA(never lost a battle), MAHARANA PRATAP, PRUTHVIRAJ CHAUHAN, DURGADAS RATHORE, AMARSINGH RATHORE then you will come to know what is history and what kind of rajpur king was in india…………
        if u r takling about luxury…… let mi clear one thing maharana pratap used to live in caves and sleep on ground directly during war days………
        i agreed that some of rajput king was only concern for there royal life……….

        • nikhil

          During the period , when the Mughals controlled Marwar, DURGADAS RATHORE was among those who carried out a relentless struggle against the occupying forces.
          So,Marwar remained in a state of war for nearly three decades.
          On 22 November 1718, on the banks of the Shipra at Ujjain,DURGADAS RATHORE died at the age of 81 years, his canopy in red stone is still at the Chakratirtha, Ujjain, which is pilgrimage for all freedom fighters and Rajputs.

          Amar Singh Rathore is considered an icon of extraordinary might, will, and freedom. Neither fear, nor greed were able to affect his decisions. He died as a free man. The bravery of Amar singh Rathore and Ballu Champavat is still remembered in folk songs in Rajasthan and around Agra.
          A gate of Agra Fort was named after him as ‘Amar Singh Gate’ which is a major tourist attraction in Agra.

    • jagmohan singh rawat

      raja dahir was not a kshtriya he was bramin

  2. S

    Sanjay, I agree with you that each stage in this war was/is equally important, but the Rajputs of Rajasthan have been over hyped and the Shaks and the Huns have blended in with them. The Thakurs of Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh are Shaks/Huns. These people never fought the jihadis, but they have a history of persecuting the natives of India. Man Singh Tomar was one such Hun who used to pay jizya to Akbar, and his aunt was Jodhabai. The Huns have formed a mafia like organization called “Akhil Bhartiya Kshatriya Mahasabha” and it contains of all the Shaks and Huns of M.P. and U.P. The Huns are very active politically – Shivraj Singh Chauhan is a Hun, as is Narendra Singh Tomar. These Huns are present in every political party, and work for the welfare of other Huns. This is a mafia and it is preventing us from fighting the real enemy. I will be writing the names of Huns and Shaks in my next post.

    • sanjaychoudhry

      This is an interesting theory. Is there any kind of research behind this, or is it derived from the bardic tradition?

      Ultimately, we are all Hindus. Anyone who becomes a Hindu and works toward protection and propagation of Sanatan Dharma has to be treated as one of our own — doesn’t matter where he came from.

    • Navrang

      Arre Bhai – Shivraj Singh Chauhan is not even a Rajput – He is OBC..Plz check facts before making these illogical and baseless comments

    • priyesh singh

      history ko to tune ********* ek kar di… ja college me aur history and sociology bhi padh

    • priyesh singh

      tu pakistan sw migrated hai ya china se?????

    • jagmohan singh rawat

      please donot write vergular things.there is a indepedence to write but it does not means you have a write baseless items

  3. S

    Sanjay, this is not a theory – it is backed by history. Like you, I too believed that anybody who has taken on Indian tradition is a Hindu and an Indian, but it is not so. Madhya Pradesh and Gujarat both are controlled by the BJP, but you have to visit MP to understand why it is lagging behind. The Thakurs who are in the top power in both the Congress and the BJP are responsible for this. They are not interested in the nation – only in making money for themselves. They call themselves Kshatriyas, but are the Shaks and the Huns. Do visit MP or UP to understand how these people behave towards others.

    I will be writing in detail about these two communities that have failed to assimilate with the Indians even after 2000 years. If this interests you, read up about Thakurs.

  4. JGN

    S, we cannot judge historical events from today’s perspective. A Kshatriya is/was supposed to protect all subjects of his kingdom without fear or favour. Your comments on Rajputs seems to be not true. Pl read this article in The Dawn: “From Udaipur, one more time – By Kamran Shafi”

    Quote

    ” I did not dwell enough on Udaipur’s resistance to Mughal hegemony in my last piece for I had just then started reading Prof John F. Richards’s The Mughal Empire.

    There can be no gainsaying the fact that the maharana of Mewar, Udai Singh, after whom Udaipur was named and who ‘descended from the Sisodia ruler Rana Sanga who had died fighting Babar at the battle of Kanua in 1527,’ gave the stiffest resistance to Akbar.

    In the words of Prof Richards: ‘Rajput willingness to accept Mughal hegemony was not won without force.’ Indeed, it took Akbar fully two months to breach the walls of the fortified city of Chitor, defended by just 5,000 Rajput warriors left behind by Udai Singh when he took himself off to a ‘subordinate fortress’.

    It is to be noted that when Akbar himself ‘killed Jaimal, the Rajput commander of Chitor, with a well-aimed musket shot, whose death broke the morale of the defenders’ the rite of jauhar was performed by setting fires as the ‘Rajputs killed their families and prepared to die in a supreme sacrifice … in a day filled with hand to hand struggles until virtually all the defenders died.
    ‘The Mughal troops slaughtered another 20-25,000 ordinary persons, inhabitants of the town and peasants from the surrounding area on the grounds that they had actively helped in the resistance. Only an audacious body of one thousand musketeers managed to escape Akbar’s wrath … Udai Singh, however, remained at large, uncaptured by the Mughals until his death four years later.’

    The above is not meant to say that Akbar was (merely) a cruel and merciless man. Such, and worse, were the ways of the conquerors in those times.

    Unquote

    http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/pakistan/from-udaipur-one-more-time–ha

    Though I have not visited UP, I had visited MP many times and of course there are some unholy nexus between Money lenders-Politicians-Criminals, but the same exists in other parts of our Country. What about the great Maratha, Sharad Pawar and his gang? How different are they from the willy Thakurs (epitomized by Arjun Singh)?

  5. JGN

    The general policy of most of the rulers during the 700 years of Muslim occupation of India was to systematically replace the fabric of Hindu society and culture with a Muslim culture. They tried to destroy Indian religions language, places of knowledge (universities e.g Nalanda were totally destroyed by Muslims). They destroyed and desecrated places of thousands of temples including Somnath, Mathura, Benaras, Ayodhaya, Kannauj, Thaneswar and in other places. There was wholesale slaughter of the monks and priests and innocent Hindus with the aim to wipe out the intellectual bedrock of the people they overran.

    The Muslims could not subjugate India with ease and were never able to rule it entirely. There was a valiant and ceaseless struggle for independence by Hindus to deliver India from Muslim tyranny. The Rajputs, Jats, Marathas and Sikhs led this struggle in North India. In the South this struggle was embodied in the Vijayanagar Empire. This struggle culminated when the Marathas ended the Muslim domination of India.

    http://www.gatewayforindia.com/history/muslim_history.htm

  6. S

    JGN, I have said that I have nothing but the greatest respect for the Kshatriyas of Rajasthan, and only a Rajput can validate what I have stated about the Shaks and the Huns. They have been trying for decades to blend into the Sisodiyas of Rajasthan (they already are into the Chauhans and Rathores). I have the guidance of a old historian and I have personally verified some of his research. I will be writing his research on this thread.

  7. sanjaychoudhry

    “I have personally verified some of his research. I will be writing his research on this thread”

    You are welcome. If you want, you can email me the article and I will publish it as a blog post.

  8. S

    sanjay – You can verify for yourself that the official calender of the government of Madhya Pradesh is the Shak calender. Why ?

    • sanjaychoudhry

      Shak Samvat is the Indian national calendar adopted by the constitution.

      This is from Wikipedia:

      “The Indian national calendar (sometimes called Saka calendar) is the official civil calendar in use in India. It is used, alongside the Gregorian calendar, by The Gazette of India, news broadcasts by All India Radio, and calendars and communications issued by the Government of India [1].”

  9. S

    The Hindu calendar is past 5000 and even the Vikram calendar is past 2060. Why would the Hindus want to make their official calendar that of an invader ?

    • Anonymous

      S, The Sātavāhana Empire (Telugu: శాతవాహన సామ్రాజ్యము) was a dynasty which ruled from Junnar (Pune), Prathisthan (Paithan) in Maharashtra and later Dharanikota or Amaravati in coastal Andhra Pradesh and Kotilingala (Karimnagar) in Andhra Pradesh over Southern and Central India from around 230 BCE onward. Although there is some controversy about when the dynasty came to an end, the most liberal estimates suggest that it lasted about 450 years, until around 220 CE. The Satavahanas are credited for establishing peace in the country, resisting the onslaught of foreigners after the decline of Mauryan empire (from Wiki). The Satavahana king Shalivahana (sometimes identified as Gautamiputra Satakarni) is credited with the initiation of the era known as Shalivahana Saka to celebrate his victory against the Sakas in the year 78AD. They were not invaders!!

  10. S

    Anonymous, you are misinformed. The Shak calendar is that of the invaders. The traditional Hindus use either the Hindu calendar or the Vikram one. The Shaks and the Huns are well settled in M.P. and U.P. going under the title of “Kshatriyas”. Digvijay Singh (the notorious anti-Hindu congreman) is a Hun as was King Mansingh Tomar who used to pay jaziya to Akbar. I am stretched for time, but I will continue to post on this thread. Here is a question for you – does it make any sense to name a calendar after the name of the invaders and stop using your own calendar which is older ?

    • JGN

      S, it seems you have a lot of strange ideas. It is now more or less proven that modern humanbeings originated in Africa and spread to other parts of the world; so would you like to believe that I am Negro?

      The above, appearing as posted by “Anonymous” was posted by me but I forgot to put my name while posting.

      There are dozens of native calenders in India. The Govt of India cannot follow all of them. Vikram Samvat is now 2067. It was recognized by the Income Tax Department till a few years back. They later adopted single Accounting Year (from April to March) throughout the country.

  11. S

    What I am writing is facts based on years of research. I said that -

    1. Mansingh Tomar was a Hun.

    2. Jaichand was a Hun.

    3. The Huns never fought with the invading muhammadans but retreated further into what are now called as M.P. and U.P.

    4. The Huns have a mafia like organization called as “Akhil Bhartiya Kshatriya Mahasabha”.

    5. The Huns are in both the major parties – the BJP and the Congress. No matter which party comes to power, the Huns benefit.

    You need to talk to someone who has lived in M.P. and U.P.

    • Looking fwd to S’s research. Very interesting.

      Can’t expect anything truthful from the bunch of deracinated idiots who occupy high chairs of history in the academy today.

    • jagmohan singh rawat

      murkh jat, i think you are mad. The vikram samvant was started was great emprror Vikramaditya of parmar dynsty was the son of veer gandhervsen and brother of raja bharatri. Vikramaditya defeated and droved away the sakas from india and in the memory of victory the vikram samvant has started. The son of vikramditya was deblok .The grandson of vikramaditya was Shalivahan who again droved away the sakas who again try to enter in india.The victory on again on saka by Shalivahan was celebrated as shalivahan saka samvant. Some historian of forigioners had written about indian samrat’s base less things and some indian author’s also adopted them.History and geneogical record of royal clan’s and there Houses are written by there bramin record holders or bhat.It is also written in history that jat’s are the desendents of saka and huna

  12. i m proud to be Rajputana.with out rajput india is like a desert
    without rajput india is like a kite with out string.
    so make rajput n enjoy the life.

    • VoP

      Another Puki scumbag coming to divide Indians. Just heard yesterday that Sindhis and Balochis hate Paki muslims to the core and are fighting for their independence!

    • rajan singh

      bhai hm rajputs me ego bhut hota hai hme chhahiye aapas me milkr rhe choti moti ladayian to hoti rhti hain pr videshiyon ka samna milkr kre aur ekbar phir in muslims ko hindustan ke bahar khader de aur india ko anti terrorist country banaye am proud to be rajput aur mai ye jrur karunga

  13. rohit

    the only time rajputs acted sensibly ws during the battle of bahraich in 1022 in wich they routed the muslims and send 300000 of those basterds to thr allah,otherwise most of the times they lost due to traitors among thr own ranks lik in tarain and khanwa and obviously the mainpulative and treachrour techniques of muslims,althoguh we can say tht they saved india for nearly 500 years from islam

  14. Shacheendra Bapat

    Friends,

    It is really good to know that we have started to know more about history and that too in a better perspective. We are slowly getting to know that what we read in the school history books was either incomplete or was incorrect to a great extant. Let us all unite as Hindus and fight the enimies (both known and unknown).

    Regarding the Shak Samvat, it is indeed a non-indian era. It was founded by the Kushan emperor Kanishk. It was used by his Shak feudatories and then was later adopted by indians. If we subtract 78 from the gregorian year, we get the corresponding year in the Shak Samvat. There is no king named Shalivahan that existed at AD 78. Gautamiputra Satkarni’s period is around 125 AD. Similarly there is no king named Vikram who existed some 60 years BC. The Vikram Samvat and Shalivahan Shak became popular after many centuries than they were considered to be founded. For us, the calendar that should be used is the Yugabd or the Yudhisthir Samvat. It started the day Yudhishthir, after the war of Mahabharat ended, was crowned the king at Indraprasth. Today, it is Yugabd 5112.

    • jagmohan singh rawat

      bapat sir, you and generaly indian people and so called historians alwayas folloewd the forieoners historion.you go through ‘bhavishya puran’ which was written by ‘ved vyas’ about 5500 year before.the history of indian kings and empire after mahabharat has been illustrated in that book.most historian also followed that. history of maurya and other dynsty could be also telly in budha and jain dharam record’s.the name of raja bharatri,vikramaditya could be forgotten by so called historian but it could not be removed by the people of india. till today folk tales of bharatri,vikramaditya could be seen in every indian villages.the description of vikramaditya is described in the old book named as’sayar o okul’ in library of turky of sulatan ‘makadme a sultaniya’.the descriptio showed in book that the rule of vikramaditya of parmar dynsty was up to saudi arbia and far.if you want to read history than first you read purans,budha or jain sahitya.

  15. you stupid S, you don’t know anything about history. Man singh Tomar was not a Hun . He was the member of 36 royal warrior clan of Rajputs like Sisodia , Rathore ,Chauhan and Sikarwar,even his grandson Ram singh Tomar was the army chief of Maharana Pratap.These all 36 clans of rajput are found in all north india .This is true that blood of shaka and huns is mix in rajputs like other castes but they served and serving the nation like others .Yes many rajput leaders in past like Man singh Kachhvaha ,Jaychand Ratore and Digvijay singh , Amar singh and Arjun singh in present ,are the blackspots on Rajput word but such types of traitors can be counted easily in Bramhins,Baniya ,Marathas,Sikhs, Jats,Gujjars and Chamar.

    • Anonymous

      i totaly enjoyed wat u said this stupid ‘s’ should understand the sacrifice of we rajputs who stand much before without bothering about their families & died for d country. none of d single community shown tat much of guts & courage. Shourya Pratap Singh Rathore

    • S

      Man Singh Tomar’s aunt (his father’s sister) was Jodhabai, who was given in Jizyah to Akbar. Man Singh himself used to send money every year to Akbar so Akbar would not invade Gwalior. His chief interests were music, dancing, and who can forget Mriganayanee.

      The Thakurs of M.P. and U.P. are different from the Rajputs of Rajasthan, and the Rajasthanis keep away from these fake Kshatriyas, comprised of Shaks and Huns.

      • @S,

        You got the name wrong. It is Man Singh Kacchwaha, not Man Singh
        Tomar. Raja Man Singh Tomar fought with the Delhi sultanate,
        particularly with Sikandar Lodi. He was not a contemporary of Akbar.

        The Mughals, particularly Akbar, made a truce with the Rajputs,
        because of recognition of power realities. The Rajputs were stronger,
        which is why Akbar decided for truce.

        You need to understand that you shouldn’t generalize people.
        Rajputs are human and so there can be good and bad.
        Those individual Rajput kings who agreed for truce were
        condemned by Maharana Pratap for their actions.

        Maharana Pratap was also a Rajput, right?

        Many Rajput kings fought against the Muslim invaders and inflicted
        hundreds of defeats on the Muslims. Why should those heroic Rajput
        kings get blamed due to some later, unheroic ones?

        The reason you and I and India in general is Hindu, is because
        of those great Rajput fighters? Otherwise we would all have
        become Muslims long back.

        So you should show respect to those Rajput kings who did not
        compromise with the invaders and fought them.

        Can Prthviraj Chauhan or Bhoja Raj be comparable to Man Singh Kacchawa?? Obviously not, though they are also Rajputs too.

        So, you need to avoid generalizing.

        • S

          Dear Jaipal, do read my posts carefully. Nowhere have I criticized the Rajputs of Rajasthan. I only said that the Shaks and the Huns, who were in the North Western part of India (Now Afgha and Pak) shifted to the interior regions of India, today M.P. and U.P. These are called as Thakurs, and for years they have been trying to get into the ranks of the Rajputs of Rajasthan. Man Singh “Kachhwaha” as you speak of does not exist as per these Thakurs, and even on Gwalior Fort, the plaques mention the name Man Singh Tomar.

          I would like to point out that Rajputs are the Kshatriyas of Rajasthan, and Rajasthan only. There are Kshatriyas in every state, including the Southern ones, who also fought actively the islamic invaders.

          I must also say that the Kshatriyas of Rajasthan are over-hyped, considering that they did not try to save their Hindu Civilization and only sought to defend their kingdoms in Rajasthan.

          You already know who broke the back of Aurangzeg’s empire – The Marathas who are the Kshatriyas of Maharashtra, and Sikhs, a new Kshatriya order founded by Guru Gobind Singh.

          • @S,

            There are a few errors in your post. The Thakurs are not descended
            from Shakas and Huns. That’s just nonsense. The Shakas were
            defeated and ethnically cleansed by the Gupta King, Chandragupta II
            around 375 AD. The Huns were also defeated and driven away
            by the Gupta King Baladitya and Yashodharman of Malwa.
            There was no mass settlement of Huns and Shakas in North India.
            The invaders were only a handful and killed off on the battlefield,
            so there are no descendants today.

            The Gwalior fort was made by Man Singh Tomar, a Tomar ruler
            of Gwalior in 1480′s AD. Man Singh Kacchawaha was a ruler
            of the the 16th century in Rajasthan, not Gwalior. Man Singh
            Kacchawaha was a general of Akbar, right?

            Rajputs are not only the Kshatriyas of Rajasthan. There were
            many Rajput Kingdoms outside of Rajasthan, like the Paramars
            of Malwa, Chandellas of Bundelkhand, Pratiharas of Kannauj,
            Chalukyas of Gujurat, the Gahadvalas, Kathehar Rajputs of
            Rohilkhand ect. Rajput was just a generic term for the
            Kshatriyas of North-Central India.

            Yes, there are Kshatriyas in every state, I never denied that.
            Indeed, Hindus across the country fought against the Muslim
            invaders. The Kshatriyas who fought the invaders in the
            Northern-Central India were called Rajputs.

            Rajputs are overhyped? Well, did they not fight and defeat the
            Muslim invaders in HUNDREDS of battles and break the backbone
            of Delhi Sultanate? Rajputs bogged down the invaders and made it
            difficult for them to consolidate. The Rajputs fought for both,
            their state as well as Hinduism. Thats why North India remained
            predominantly Hindu in character.

            I agree with you that the Marathas and later the Sikhs broke the
            backbone of the Mughals. But Marathas and Sikhs appeared
            later on the scene. Before them, the Rajputs were fighting
            the invaders, along with Vijayanagar Empire. The Marathas and
            Sikhs completed what the Rajputs started.

            In other words, the Hindu resistance is interconnected.
            The Rajputs were the main force between 1200 -1600 AD,
            followed by the Marathas and Sikhs, from 1600 AD-1800 AD.

            Rajput resistance is what made Maratha resistance and Sikh
            resistance feasible after a couple of centuries. Its all
            interconnected. You have to see the big picture.

            • S

              Dear Jaipal,
              First, the fort in Gwalior is over two thousand years old, and it was made by King Suraj Sen. There are temples on the Gwalior Fort dated five hundred years before Man Singh Tomar was born. You can google “Sahastrabahu Temple” and “Teli Ka Mandir” for confirmation. Man Singh Tomar made two buildings on this Fort, the first being Man Mandir, and the second a castle for one of his wives, Mriganayanee.

              Second, the term “Rajputs” is used solely by the Kshatriyas of Rajasthan. The Ksatriyas of Bundelkhand are called as Bundelas. The Chalukyas use the term “Solanki”, and there are different names for the others. This differentiation indicates their past. The Rajputs and the Bundelas and the Solankis, among others, actually fought against the invaders, unlike the Thakurs, who were jizya paying collaborators.

              Here I must point out that the Marathas and the Sikhs were the only ones who actually went out of their states, their kingdoms, to destroy the empire of Aurangzeb, the Rajputs of Rajasthan were mostly defending their own forts and towns. This is where the hype is.

              • @S,

                About the Gwalior fort, yes it precedes Man Singh Tomar.
                You are right. Is the entire, whole fort bullt by Raja Surya Sen?

                About the term “Rajput”, it simply reflects the nobility.
                Rajputs have 36 clans, so these various clans simply have
                different clan specific names like Bundelas, Chandellas, Pratihara,
                Paramara, Tomar, Chauhan, ect ect. But all of them are “Rajputs”,
                since they were ruling clans in different parts of North-Central India.
                These names simply reflect the various clans under the umbrella term
                “Rajput”.

                About the Marathas and Sikhs, yes they did go out of their states.
                But how do you know that Rajputs in the past simply stayed in their
                own state? They could have also launched offensives outside their
                state as well. For example, Rana Sanga made many offensives
                against the Delhi sultanate, outside of his state.

                Prithviraj Chauhan made an offensive against the Chandellas in
                the 1180′s AD. Remember Alha and Udal stories? So, he never
                had any problem moving out of his state. Rajput chieftains
                made raids into Delhi and Hansi from Rajasthan against the Delhi
                Sultanate, particularly in the times of Ghiasuddin Balban, which threw
                the Turks off balance. So I think you are mistaken.

                • S

                  Hi Jaipal,
                  I’ll answer your question first. Maharaja Suraj Sen started the work on the fort and has supposed to have ruled from there. I found out that most of the buildings made by him were destroyed during the Islamic invasion, as was also a Shiva Temple built atop the fort.

                  While studying the Gwalior fort, one can see and even identify the older sections and the walls, some stand from the time of Maharaja Suraj Sen, while some are of British time. There are multiple palaces and castles on the Gwalior fort, some ancient, though the Sahastrabahu Temple and the Teli Ka Mandir are the only ones with the least damage.

                  Now regarding the word “Rajput”, it was not in existence in Western India, when the first attacks took place. In fact the word used to describe the warrior classes was the Sanskrit Kshatriya. The Hindi word “Khatri” was used in central India, and one can actually find the Khatris of U.P. who use this to describe who they are, they don’t use “Rajput”. Similarly, in the area of Punjab-Sindh, the word “Khatri” was used. The usage of “Rajput” did not start until much later, and was limited to the state of Rajasthan. It is only a recent phenomenon that some Thakurs are trying to pass themselves as Rajputs.

                  More on the Kshatriyas, in the Southern states, there are different words used for Kshatriyas, for example a Kshatriya from Maharashtra was called a “Maratha”, and Andhra region had yet another word for it.

                  My points are – 1. There is too much hype with the Rajputs, so much so that people are clamouring to get into the Rajput ranks, whereas the other Kshatriyas are conveniently ignored. It is as Bharat was sending all it’s Kshatriyas to Rajasthan and it were these who finally broke the back of Islamic empire. It is just not true.

                  2. History is being re-written by these people trying to get into the Rajput ranks. The myth that Man Singh made the Gwalior Fort is part of this effort of re-writing. There is actually widespread propaganda about the so-called Rajputs defeating Aurangzed, with no mention of Marathas and the Sikhs.

                  It’s a pleasure discussing history with someone who is well informed and open minded. I think you will like this site -

                  http://www.historyofjihad.org/india.html?syf=contact

                  • @S,

                    I have seen that site, history of Jihad some years ago.

                    About the Gwalior fort, the present fort that exists as we see it,
                    then who built the entire present day fort, if not Man Singh Tomar?
                    I am asking about the author of its present structure and existence.

                    So how and when did this term “Rajput” come about, if according to you
                    it was never the term used by all the Kshatriyas of North-Central India?

                    What about dynasties like Chandellas, Gahadvalas, Paramaras ect?
                    Did they not call themselves Rajputs? And if not, then what was their
                    specific title?

                    Are you aware that there are hundreds of inscriptions recording battle
                    victories by Hindu Kings in North-Central India against the Delhi
                    Sultanate? So who were these Hindu Kings, if they are not Rajputs?

                    As I said earlier, Rajputs played a role in breaking the back of Delhi
                    Sultanate, whereas the Marathas and Sikhs broke the back of the
                    Mughals. The resistance is interconnected and should be
                    appreciated as such.

                    • S

                      Hello Jaipal – the history of jihad site has the answers to most of your questions except about the Gwalior Fort. The “modern fort” as you call it was not built by a single ruler. The fort walls are two thousand years old in some places, and in some places there is patchwork done by the British, and more recently, the Archaeological Survey Of India. As I said before, the temples and palaces there are made by different rulers in different ages.

      • korde sagar

        arrre bhai , ek bat sun lo . ham log Muslims se hare kyun ki hum United nahi hai. aur ham logome egos hai. we have that obc, Nt, st, and all that bulshits.
        if we all hindus unite for only “five days” then we clean all other muslims from our country. gandhi “ji” ne hamare desh ki jo ******** karni thi kar di lekin ab wo sochake kya fayada . so my last msg. to all hindus that unite first .

    • You see this is the only reason I think why Indians failed infront of foreign invaders, dividing us into Rajput, Marathas, Sikhs, Bengalis etc, Nobody will forget the great ruler Ranjit Singha who conqured Afganisthan and avenged the defeat and death of Raja Jaipal and Prithviraj years before, I also salute king lalitaditya muktapida who also captured foreign Arab lands at the time of muslim Caliphate, Bappa Rawal being a rajput he captured

      ccconqured

      avenged the defeat of Raja Jaipal anPrithviraj chohan years before, I salute the great salute

  16. Rajiv Chandran

    I understand this post is about Rajput’s – however there is some discussion here about the Andhra-Satavahanas and Vikramaditya and related periods of Indian History. After the fall of hypothesis like Aryan Invasion it is indeed important for us to examine if the dates and events we assume to be correct – and the chronology as narrated by western historians – does indeed hold up to evidence or not ? Two scholars Shri Kota Venkatachalam & Shri K. D Sethna have systematically deconstructed the modern chronology of Indian history and come up with a chronology that substantially preserves the Puranic narrative. You can find snippets and in-depth discussions of Shri Venkatachalam’s works here
    http://trueindianhistory-kvchelam.blogspot.com/
    http://kmrao.wordpress.com/2009/08/02/the-historicity-of-vikramaditya-and-salivahana/
    http://kmrao.wordpress.com/2009/11/25/sri-kota-venkatachalam-a-complete-scholar-historian/
    In this chronology The Satavahana empire ends around the time of the Alexandrian invasion, and the era of the Guptas begin. At the end of the millenium two great emperors viz Vikramaditya & let his grandson Shalivahana (not Gautamiputra Satakarni) establish dominion all over India. The great Raja Bhoja and the last of the Chauhan’s Prithviraja are linear descendends of the same agnivamsha line. These narratives also place buddha at around 1800 bc (as per traditional indian and tibetian accounts) approximately 1200 years after the great bharata war whose traditional date is circa 3100 bc. This would also place Chandragupta Maurya and his descendents in the middle of the 2nd millenium bc. The information herein also contains illuminating discussions on the various shakas dedicated to vikramaditya and shalivahana – thier actual dates and the confusion in thier attribution to Shakhas (Scythians) perhaps deliberately engineered by colonial hacks pretending to be historians.

  17. Sachin Singh Gaur

    S .u r not aware of history and trying to misguide people…… the hun and shaks are jat gujar and yadav.not rajputs….. they are pure kshatriyas and always have been treated like that……

  18. So what if some Huns or Shak were absorbed into Hindu Dharma? That only shows how open-minded our Hindu civilisation is…. We absorb even our invaders fully and intermarried so they melded into the Hindu milieu. Not a trace remains of who a Shak or Hun was (except in our imaginations).

    Hindu Dharm is not limited to a race…. Anybody of any race can choose to become a Hindu and worship Bhagawan (the Universal Deity). That is the greatness of Hindu Dharma.

    Today, you have millions of native Hindus still living in Bali, Java, Kalimantan, Sumatra (Indonesia), Cham (Vietnam) for two millenia… as well as a few million recent converts (American, European, African, Japanese, Chinese, Arab) who have become Hindu thanks to ISKCON, Swamis and Yoga over the past several decades.

  19. Anonymous

    It was very good and enjoyable

  20. rajat

    shivraj sing chuvan bhi rajput hay . wo ek kirar rajput hay

  21. sajawal ahmed

    rajput are nothing they think they are very high but see who give theior sister and daughter to mughals for their purpose he could not be great while jatts always fight with mughals and jatts and rajputs also fight with each other but no one is superior

    • mugals always fight with rajput or hindhu kings with ‘dhke se’ not by their war skillness or by bravery,in many battles hindhu/rajput kings won battle against mugal bur that was not shown by eigher by mugal historian nor by our so called secular govt to please mugal’s. in mohamadan only pathan are brave as rajput bur other mohammadan ruler were coward and win only by there winkness,history of prithivi raj chohan ,veer durgadas,maharana pratap,rana kumbha,raja bhoj like many hindhu rajput kings are famous for there valour but all mohamadan kings are known for there cowardness and winkness

      • @Jagmohan,

        You are absolutely right.
        The Rajput kings had HUNDREDS of battle victories against the
        Turks of Delhi sultanate, proven by inscriptions from that period.

        Hindu Rajput kings were strong.

        Later, the Marathas and Sikhs completed the job.

  22. the grand daughter of aurangeb lived with maharaja of jodhpur as a rakhel also the sister of aurangeb loved and relations with chatrasal of bundi .during rathire rule in mewar rathore solders also looted mugal haram to keep marrige with rathore solders

  23. rohit

    is tarah ki comment karte sharm aani chahiye

  24. RAJVEER SINGH

    This is a reality that RAJPUTS are greatest hindu warriors. no one other has such courage. They fought 500 years with muslims. yes I do agree that they have done some mistakes like they don’t have unity. if they have unity than no one can defeat them. still having very small forces they faught very bravely with the highly armoured,skilled and large number of muslim army.
    like (5000 rajputs soliders and 50000 muslim soldiers) is it comparable.

    So respect RAJPUTS,
    RAJVEER SINGH

    • @rajveer Singh,

      How do you know that Rajput forces were small?
      They may have had large enough army too.

      Because there are HUNDREDS of inscriptions which record
      Rajput victories against the Muslim Turks of Delhi sultanate.
      Thats means hundreds of battle victories, right there.

      To accomplish that many victories, the Rajputs must have had
      sufficient military power and skill.

      The problem is that these many Hindu Rajput victories are
      not mentioned in standard history books because of vested
      interests.

      Medieval war history is very highly selective and biased
      against the Hindu Heroism and victories.
      Historians relying on the Muslim records have tried to
      give the impression that Rajputs/Hindus were always on the losing
      side by highlighting in a very selective manner of alleged Muslim
      victories and Hindu defeats but totally ignoring the evidence
      of HUNDREDS of Hindu victories mentioned by Hindu inscriptions.

      This naturally gives a wrong view of Hindu military prowess and
      success in the battlefield against the Muslim invaders.

      What do you think?

  25. ritesh

    well most indians are aware of the brave, courageous and chivilarious nature of rajputs, but still i feel hindus in the south were better soldiers for they were skilled fighters though most of the time they didnt have a good weapon or body armour and they had to do away with spears which were often short than those of the well armoured islamic horses and lancers…. Still they were undefeated in any major battle for almost 250years till undone by two treacherous muslim battalions of rama raya turned up against him when another hindu victory was immenent at talikota. I would personally rate warriors in the south and west like malwa the better than rajput when it came to hand to hand fighting…. But rajputs were ofc better on horseback and had the spirit to fight till cut to last man…. That hardly could nt be found amongst many other. Rajputs were nationalists but vijaynagaran rulers were protectors of hinduism.

    • @Ritesh.,

      See my reply above to Rajveer Singh on the Rajput victories.

      About hand to hand combat, Hindus in general, whether Rajput,
      Vijayanagar, Maratha ect were excellent. One on one, the Hindu
      warrior was unbeatable in hand to hand combat.

      The spirit of fighting to the last man existed in all the Hindu armies,
      not just Rajput.

      Just for your information, in one battle in 1220 AD, a Hindu Rajput
      king by name Maharaja Bhartu/Bharahadeva, defeated and
      slaughtered more than 120 000 Turk Muslims in one shot by his
      hand and sword! This is mentioned by Muslim historian.
      This shows that Hindus and Rajputs excelled in hand to hand combat.

      The Turks were actually afraid to come close in hand to hand combat
      with Hindu warriors. They preferred to shoot arrows from horseback
      rather than trying to engage the Hindu fighters in hand to hand
      combat, because chances of success would be less.

  26. ritesh

    i partially agree with u. . .that indian forces excelled on hand to hand fighting but in my 4 years of indian historic research I have read a lot about the fear and respect of rajput cavalry by the islamic forces…. For eg the one that routed muhammad ghors forces in one thunderous charge at the first battle of tarain by prithviraj… Also there are hardly any reference of the rout of entire rajput army which concludes they preferred to die fighting rather than turn their backs and run away…. There were some instances of an hindu army being routed partially for e.g at the battle of talikota when we move southwards…. A point to be noted here is islamic forces were never really feared for superiority and might by any of the indian supposedly hindu monarch….as muslims mainly relied on subfertuge excepting some militarily genius muslim commanders.

    • beta sahi chal rahey ho, jo history muslim,yunani,shako,huno,britishers and now a days andhey so called indian historian and congress/communist/jd /mulayam/mayawati jaisey mentality key log kar rahey hey ,usi disha mey sahi ja rahey ho ,bhagwan aap ko sahi disa dey.One thing is more that these type of comments could not back the greatness of kyshtiya

      • @Jagmohan Singh Rawat,

        Could you translate your above Hindi post, for the benefit of
        the readers here, including me?

        Do you agree with Ritesh’s views or not?

        • jagmohan singh rawat

          ritesh jaisey log itihas ka kachara padtey hey tatha vidhesi/mugal /communist vichar dhara par chaltey hey.kuch logo ko desh key gorav ko ujagar karna chahtey hey

  27. karan

    Raja Bhoja organized his armies to attack Sultan Mahmud Ghaznavi who had invaded Somnath. Ghaznavi fearing the powerful army of Bhoja retreated via the desert of Sindh to avoid a clash (reported by Turkic author Gardizi as Indian Padshah Parmar Dev) with the Indian king and lost many of his men. Bhoja repulsed the Ghazi Saiyyad Salar Masud who led an army into India to conquer the northern India which his uncle, Sultan Mahmud Ghaznavi, had failed to conquer. Then Bhoja realizing the threat, organized a confederation of Indian kings including the Kalachuri Lakshmi-Karna, the Chahamana and other Indian kings to fight the Salar Masud. In the Battle of Bahraich the northern India confederacy fought a pitched battle for about a month with the Ghaznavi army and completely defeated them killing Salar Masud in the process. They then went on to conquer Hansi, Thaneshvar, Nagarkot and other cities taken by the Ghaznavids and marched against Lahore and besieged it. Just at the point Lahore was about to fall to them, the Indian kings had a disagreement over who would own the captured territories and their armies disbanded and dispersed in a huff. Bhoja started fighting other Indian kings who were his erstwhile allies in the war against the Ghaznavids.
    He was an ambitious builder. He was building a great temple, with
    the largest shiva-linga on the shore of an enormous lake he had
    created. Even now you can see the blueprints of the structural
    components on the rocks nearby. The temple unfortunately was never
    finished, it would have been one of the grandest, and the lake was
    drained. Nothing that he built really stands. However if I may
    borrow part a shloka from Bhartrihari,

    • noor

      Raja Bhoj, King of Dhar – a town near the Chambel River in Malwa
      Plateau in Central India was enjoying a quiet midnight in his palace
      garden, when he saw the moon split into two halves which moved away
      from each other. Frightened at this sight, he raised an alarm
      thinking the destruction of world was at hand. Hundreds of thousands
      of people of Western India witnessed this disturbing sight. The
      pundits poited out from `Bhavishya Puran’ that it had been foretold
      that a great personage will be born in Arabia. He would not be
      taught how to read and write yet he would teach the world that they
      knew not. His teachings would be logical, wonderful and simple.
      These teachings would influence the world. His name would be
      Muhammad. The splitting of the moon would be one of his numerous
      miracles. That those who would not follow the teachings of this
      great divine messenger would eventually be losers on this earth and
      in the next life. Raja Bhoj accordingly converted to Islam.

  28. @Ritesh,

    You mentioned the fear and respect of the Rajput Cavalry by the
    Islamic forces. Could you please explain?

    • @Ritesh,

      In what sense did the Muslims fear the Rajput cavalry?
      was it due to speed and focused attack along with
      superioriority in wielding the sword?

      Could you mention some of the reasons for this fear?

      • @Ritesh,

        Which were the sources you consulted in your Indian history
        research for the four years? I’m also interested in knowing more
        on the politico-military resistance offered by the Rajputs against
        the Turks.

        Did you know that there are hundreds of inscriptions that record
        Rajput battle victories against the Turks?

        Our standard history books never mention all this, unfortunately.
        They give a false impression of Muslim walk-over by being highly
        selective in presenting the facts.

  29. ritesh

    @jaipal brother currently i am working at a far away place frm my home in an alien town at a pharmacy firm working in 12hours shift. With no source to my personal computer which had many links saved… And i’ve had read some books as well…. Linking sources frm my previous generation phone is quiet nt my cup of tea but I would still try to give u a fair idea about the fact in my next comment and also sources.

    • @ritesh,

      The reason I’m asking is because I’m planning to write a history
      book, in three volumes, about the Hindu politico-military resistance
      to the Muslim invaders in a connected account, spanning a time
      period from 636 AD to 1840 AD.

      Volume 1: 636 AD-1206 AD. Rajput resistance to Muslim invaders.

      Volume 2: 1206 AD-1556 AD. Rajput, Orissan, Ahom, Jat and
      Vijayanagar resistance to Muslim
      invaders.

      Volume 3: 1570 AD-1840 AD. Maratha, Sikh, Rajput, Jat, Ahom
      resistance and final victory
      against Muslim invader.

      I’m planning to write these volumes a couple of years later, so
      I need some help in accessing reliable sources. If you don’t mind
      maybe you can help me out.

      The reason I’m planning to write these volumes is because
      standard history books never mention the stiffness and resiliency
      of Hindu military resistance and its many battle victories.
      They give false impression that Hindus did nothing against the
      Islamic invaders and meekly accepted them. This is of course
      not true at all.

      I would like to help in dispelling this false notion.

  30. ritesh

    jaipal my first encounter with real indian history was when i read a book called short history of indian wars by swami sachchidanand in gujrati language called bharatiya yudho no sankshit ithihas. Well he’s a sanyasi a rationalist and country lover and he also does nt hate muslims or does nt preaches any religion. Swami is just a term given by people to him. Well there were many pro indian foriegn author i read abt lyk koelnard elst and francious gautier who extensively wrote about india with sita ram goel, ram swarup and many others too many to recollect. I dont remember the sources where the farsi, arabic and other sources were translated as recorded by the then islamic invaders in india…. Which gives u an accurate idea about the history as they maintained better records than indians themselves. I just hope u b lucky googling them to b of help. Also i am looking to do a degree in history if the university offers any distance learning option i am soon to investigate u myt also let me knw if u knw one. I would suggest u to keep both historical sources in ur hand the jamia islamia historical studies and the ones by pro hinduists lyk sita ram goel. U can find his works at voiceofdharma dot com or org i dont remember. I just wish u good luck with ur work. Would lyk to be of help when i buy a new lappy. Hopefully very soon

    • @Ritesh,

      Excessive reliance on Muslim records is prone to give an
      unbalanced narrative. Muslim historians wrote history in a
      biased manner, in order to make Islam look good.
      They are likely to have ignored many defeats and set backs that
      the Islamic forces suffered at the hands of Hindu kings.

      Actually, there are many Hindu inscriptions that can tell us alot
      about our history, including battle history.

      We should build a narrative of Hindu battle victories based on our
      own Hindu sources, and if necessary cross correlate and cross
      check with the Muslim records, to get a more clearer idea.

      I was wondering if you know any Indian sources that describes
      Hindu battle victories, particularly against the Delhi Sultanate?

  31. ritesh

    @jaipal you are ryt that islamic records would have a bit of partiality in them but the funny part is their own records shows them in bad light which is good from the islamic point of view but too ugly and shameful from the world point of view…. For e.g. They themselves recorded their foul tactics to win the battle claiming allah guided them to do the same like contaminating the source of water to a city or fort by cow flesh which being holy to hindu to make the surrender or blackmailing the king, commanders or gatekeeper to do not participate in battle or open gates by helding one of their family members at sword point.

    Other records show them committing genocides and mass rapes…. Which were wrote to get a pat from khalifa in turn 4 his acknowlegment frm him doing great deeds in the name of religion and spread of islam… In particular i had read one such record where emperor raised an huge army frm non combatants for a campaign and this guy used to be so poor to afford two times of food…. Lived in a small shanty and maintained one wife…. And he had never had killed an insect all his life but after the fall of the imperial city which was i believe delhi was asked to kill all the male non combatant captives who lived in the city to be chopped off their heads and those muslim who doesnt follow the order would be chopped down by the emperor himself…. Hence begin the wild carnage where it is said that some 50-60k people were chopped down in next 20-30mins… The whole city bathed in blood and then they slept with any women the could get their hands on…. In the end every soldier had 5-6 woman taken as a comcubine…. The rapes legalized by allah….
    Also there is this interesting story how the jouhar practise started… In the event when king dahir was killed in the battle a messenger came with the ill fated news that the king has died and they are marching towards the capital… They have laid waste all the towns in their way causing great slaughter and rape…. So the queen and the noble woman folk in the palace decided to commit suicide by drinking poison…. But the messengers said that the muslims are so lecherous that they even sleep with the dead corpse…. To escape frm their hands they commited mass jouhar and all the woman who lost their husband or father willingly jumped into the fire. However two daughter of dahir fell to the enemy hands which is again another story
    Their are many such stories written by their own historians that exposes the great myth of indian muslims that their ancestors were peacefully converted…

    Well the great solanki(bhimdev) rulers of chalukya’s do have their inscriptions as the slaughterer of the melchchas( meccans) and that of vijaynagaran and maratha’s inscriptions or historical records r nt that hard to find….

  32. ritesh

    also communist historians claim that india never had a hindu vs muslim fight in history as there were both hindu and muslim soldiers on both the sides… Just 4 eg rana pratap had his most trust worthy commander as a muslim and even the akbar sent his vassal hindu king to fight him… They conclude it to be a politically motivated war rather than religion… Ditto about the vijaynagaran wars with bahamani kingdoms who had lots of hindu commanders at their services. U need a strong point to refute this claim

    • @Ritesh,

      Those Hindu commanders in the Bahamani’s were probably
      blackmailed to join them, as their families may have been kept
      as hostage.

      But the fact is Hindu Kingdoms at the time fought the invaders
      to protect Hindu religion and culture whereas the Muslim invaders
      were out to destroy and uproot the Hindu religion and culture.

      Just because there were some Hindu generals in Muslim forces
      or Muslims in Hindu forces doesn’t negate the fundamental fact that
      these wars were predominanatly wars between Hindu forces and
      Muslim forces.

      Hindus at the time were fighting in defence of their religion and culture
      against Islamic onslaught.

      Make no mistake, these were religious wars. Hindu inscriptions by
      the Hindu kings clearly show the intent.

      Communist historians are biased and anti-Hindu. They don’t want
      Hindus to know that they fought against Muslim invaders who were
      out to destroy Hindu civilization. So, they make claims that Hindus
      and Muslims lived in peace, which is certainly not true.

      You should read this book “Eminent Historians” by Arun Shourie.
      He has exposed these Communist historians for what type of frauds
      they really are.

      • @ Jaipal, you are right. I have read and re-read the illuminating book “Eminent Historians” by Arun Shourie. These communist historians, in my humble view, though they are intelligent, are extremely biased against Hindus so much so that they want to brush under the carpet historical atrocities committed by Muslim invaders against Hindus and this is what Konraad Elst called “negationism.”

        • @NV Sudhakar,

          Thanks for understanding.

          But we also need to keep in mind that Hindus at this time did not
          simply just sit still doing nothing. They fought back militarily too.

          This aspect of Indian history, particularly Hindu military resistance
          and its many battle victories are not told.

          Lets not delude ourselves, Hinduism survived in India precisely
          because Hindus fought back and finally won in the final round
          against the Muslim invaders.

  33. ritesh

    yes i’ve read arun shourie as well…. But no those were traitorous hindu’s bought for a bit of money and piece of land or jagir and while interretating about history u must always leave room 4 exceptions as there used to be some traitorous muslims who fought 4 the mother land instead of religion lyk ibrahim gardi the maratha commander in charge of the guns and canons who fought at panipat against abdali and nawab of oudh…. Also muslims fought in the name of religion but hindus had two approach… During initial stages hindus fought to free their motherland from outsiders but when oppression and atrocities on hindus became a habit did they realize to stand 4 the religion is the need of the time…. Vijaynagar in particular was formed on these lines….. During short islamic conquest of south india two brothers hari hara and bukka raya were forcibly converted to islam and they said to have served in their command before being convinced by a brahman to stand up and fight 4 hindus and they reconverted back to hinduism before setting out to form a kingdom who unarguably fought on religious lines,… This story is similar to the one of shivaji…. But vijaynagar is one of the highly undercovered empire of india …. And i sense that it is because of the communist historians who dont wish to give vijaynagarans its rightful place and importance in history 4 muslim appeasement…. Vijaynagar remained undefeated for 250years a feat matched by non of the indian powers against islamists.

  34. @Ritesh,

    You are right about the concept of exceptions.

    However Vijayanagar was not the only power that fought the Muslims.
    Orissa also kept them largely in check, as well as the Ahom dynasty
    of Assam. Rajput kings of Mewar also kept the Muslims in check
    as well as the Hindu Kingdoms in Central India like Bundelas, Baghelas,
    Jats also fought the invaders as well, the Khap Panchayats.

    The Communist historians are a bunch of traitorous frauds.

  35. ritesh

    yes the ahoms and kings of orissa maintained its independence but they did nt go on counter offensive lyk vijaynagar did…. Nor did they fought as much wars and gained as many victories as did by vijaynagarans…. The sucess of vijaynagarans may be credited to its huge and extensive network of scouts….they fought the portugese at goa…. Vijaynagar was well capable of defeating any islamic forces that invaded india but had it nt been betrayed by its own islamic battalions….

  36. @Ritesh,

    Good post.
    You mentioned about Rajput cavalry and the respect and fear it
    provoked among the Islamic forces.

    Could you please explain about that a bit more?

  37. ritesh

    horsesandswords.blogspot.com/2011/08/battle-of-tarain-estimate-of-forces-on.html?m=1
    Please give it a read.

    The above is the most logical blog i found esp of the rajputana cavalry easily defeating the so called famed cavalry force of the times… Also babur’s biography babarnama gives us a fair idea of how much fear the rajputs had struck in their heart that they started to believe that the defeat was inevitable. Babur had to resort to foul tactics too boost the morale of its soldiers and further angry the rajputs soldiers and lead them to self destruction by hurling the severed head of rajputs amongst indian ranks or raising them in spears amongst many others…. Sources of history are highly unreliable on wiki and there are many versions of a particular battle and its interpretations and conclusions all by different historians relying on their own sources. We tend to pick the one that comforts us…. well 11th century marked the coming of age of rajput cavalry which formed an integral part of the rajput warrior culture later on till 16th century after which they just remained nominal powers in india.

    • jagmohan singh rawat

      It has been seen by various discussion that many people keep intrest on rajput history,in all above discussion some persons are totally sayings negative for rajputs/kyshtriya , they also try to distiguish between rajput of rajputana to other part’s, the intension to divide them, they also said for rajput of rajputana hypered, actuaally these kamin people wants time pass/muskhari.These people should think that these cheep type comments could not lower the greatness of rajputs,actually i thinks that these type of people have inferiority complex in there mind, they could not be equal with the kyshtriya, the geat deeds done by them, the deeds of kyshtriya are miracle for these type of people,jai bhawani,

      • S

        Mr. Rawat, the comments above are very clear in these points -

        1. The word “Rajput” describes a Kshatriya of Rajasthan. It is true and backed by historical evidence.

        2. Most Kshtriyas of North India were/are known as Khatris, or just Kshatriyas. In Maharashtra, they are called Marathas, in Bundelkhand they are called “Bundelas”.

        3. At no point in the comments above have the Kshatriyas been insulted. However, it is pointed out that of all the Kshatriyas who fought for the defence of Mother India, only the Sikhs and the Marathas are responsible for the present day freedom that we enjoy today.

        4. It has also been pointed out, and well recorded in history, that the Rajputs of Rajasthan are over-hyped, as their campaigns were limited to the protection of their states, and not Greater India.

        As for your statement that their is some sort of “intention” to divide the Rajputs, Mr. Rawat, will you give your daughter in wedding to a Kshatriya warrior of Maharashtra ? Or Punjab ?

        • jagmohan singh rawat

          Dear commentator, you have nil knowledge about history and branches and clans of kyshtriya/rajput of various location, although it is not possible to describe whole thing on this mail :- (1) Your first point is not true, there is no evidence of present kyshtriya/rajput of presntly living in rajasthan,all are migrated from one place to another place according to nececities.Acoording to history of rajputana by thakur harnam singh chohan, upto the 4th century ‘nag’ were shifted by parmar’s from whole of the rajputana and dharni varah of parmar kings distributed the noukoot marwar in his ninth brothers.Presently bhati’s came in lodharva(jaiselmer) from punjab in about 8th century by shifting parmar , these parmar went to maharastra now they are ‘dalvi deshmukh’ .The rathod came from kannuge (up) in 12 century, the kachwaha (shekhawat/rajawat/naruka/khangarot) came from narwar in 11th century.The privious rajput parmar,chouhan,solanki and padiyar/parihar either surving dynsty or living as samant/sardar’s of present states or shifted to other places or states.So your reply automatically is no true on ground or base that there are only rajput are in rajasthan. (2)Your second point is baseless.Khatri are punjabi or rajasthani trader cast not for kyshtiya/rajput.The all castes in maharastra are called marathas whether they kyshtrya/rajput; brahmin,kayasth or obc castes of there.There are nos of kyshtriya /rajput clan in maharastra like lokandey,mohitey,nipenkar, naik nimbalkar,bhosaley, bhoitey,jadhav,panwar,puarr,jagdaley,sawant,ghorpadey,tawarey etc are varioua clans of all branches of kyshtriya/rajput of sisodia/bhati/tanwar/parmar/rathod etc.For example naik nimbalkar of ‘phaltan’ state are parmar, ‘ghatgey’ of kagal state are rathod, bhosaley of kohalapur ,satara are sisodiya ,ghorpadey of mudhol state are sisodiya, tawarey are tanwar,bhoitey/jadhav/jedhey are bhati etc.Similarly patwardhan are bramin and thakrey are chitasenia kayastha(kayastha),deshpandey are also chitrasenia kayastha.But generally less knowedge of people like you told whole maratha people to kyshtriya.I Again want to tell you that the true knowdge about kyshtriya/rajput only could tell kyshtriya/rajput not aira gera nathu khera.The the branches of rathod of kannauge are gaharwar,daiya(manda state of up),chand of kumaou(uttakhand), bundela etc (3)As you dont about castes and clan as stated above , the sikh is not a caste ,it is a relgion ,the famous worriers in sikh army like banda bahadur(minhas rajput,a clan of kachwaha branch), bhai vachittar singh (parmar) etc ,there are nos of kyshtriya/rajput worriers like chohan ,parmar,solanki, rathod ,kachwaha etc.The bhatti/sidhu are bhati rajput, grewal sikh are chandel rajput, virk sikh are solanki rajput and so many.The clans of marathas already explained by me in paragraph 2 (4)Your 4th poit is also disappointing the sacrifice and glory of kyshtriya/rajput.In the 7th century the maurya army(parmar) of chittoregarh in the command of bappa rawal(who has been also called founder of sisodiya dynsty of mewar) invaded and drove away the’arabs’ up to persia.The man morya was the last king of chittore after that his ‘bhanja’ bappa rawal got sitted on the throne fo chittore. Before chittore army arab’s were defeated by padihar kings.In 57 bc the shak’s were defeated and drove away by parmar king veer vikramditya of ujjain ,the name of which is famed in whole indian penesuila and far west upto persia.The vikram samvant was started by them on victory upon shak’s.The name of vikamaditya is famed in many stories like ‘vikram aur vetal’,’sihanan battishi’ etc.The granson of vikramaditya was ‘shalivahan’ who again drove away and defeated shak’s and started ‘shalivahan shak samvant”.In the 10 century the combined army of rajput kings with the army of raja bhoj parmar ,in the command of ‘suhal dev’ king of srawasti(distt basti, up),bruitely defeated the army of ‘masud’(the nephew of mahmood gajanawi) and about 3 lakhs muhamadan army was bruitely killed and india was free from muhamadon attacks for next 200 year and after that in 12th century muhammad gori came in india.The father of razia bano ‘balban’ was killed bu maharana ari singh of mewar,auranzeb was defeated in battle of gogunda and surrender against marana raj singh jee(the great grand son of maharana pratap) after that aurangeb made a treaty with mewar, which is called third treaty of mewar with mugals.Maharana pratap self defeated the mugal’s and snatched 24 nos of forts of mewar from mugal army except chittoregarh and mandalgarh remains to whom maharana raj singh jee captured.The shivajee who was from the same linage of sisodiya of mewar,drove away the mugal.The chatrasal bundela freed bundelkhand from mugal’s. At last i want to tell you if you dont know about history not write cheap comments for publicity, rajput better know there history and past glory, the cheat time comments like you and like other people like you cannot less the glory of rajputs,if you have a small amount of ‘sharm’ or if you have a real son of your father you should not comments for the rajput;s and the ruler who laid there lives for there motherland.I think it is enough for you if you are not bastard

          • S

            Mr. Jagmohan Rawat – Here are a few more facts for you -

            1. The Rawats are not regarded as Rajputs. Neither by the Kshatriyas of Rajasthan, nor by the Thakurs of M.P. and U.P.

            2. The so-called “history” and “facts” that you have spouted is the horse crap that the Thakurs spout, not the Rajputs of Rajasthan.

            Incidentally, can you tell me something about Kshatriyas who are not Sisodiya, Parmar, Rathor, or the long list in your post above, from Rajasthan. From your comment it comes across as if the Hindus were getting their Kshtriyas migrated either to Rajasthan, or from Rajasthan.

            The only thing is, neither are you a Kshatriya from Rajasthan, nor will you be accepted by them.

            • jagmohan singh rawat

              murkh man. i am parmar of title rawat from the royal dynsty of parmar of garhwal also have relation in many thikana’s of rajasthan and other states,so we need no acceptance from any , we self are the zamidari of padsoli consisting of 52 villages,see gajettier of garhwal raj ,by writter h g watson.ics,1910 edition of natraj publication,deharadun

              • S

                I can see your intelligence in the posts above – Well, Mr. Rawat, of the royal dynasty of Parmar of Garhwal with relations in Rajasthan, which according to you is the breeding place of Rajputs who were then exported to other states like Maharashtra and Punjab to become Marathas and Sikhs, can you explain some more things to this Murkh Man -

                1. Who are the Gaddis ?

                2. Who are the Kshatriyas of South India ?

                I am still reeling from this gem of knowledge from you that the Khatris of Northern India are traders, but it must be obvious considering that the word Khatri is Hindi Apbhransh of the Sanskrit Kshatriya.

                • jagmohan singh rawat

                  If the rajputana is the only place of breeding according to you than what is the cast of bhagwan ram whose birth place was in ayodhya(up) and what is the cast of bhagwan krishna whose birth place was in mathura(up)?

                  • S

                    Mr. Rawat, as I have stated repeatedly -

                    1. All Kshatriyas are not Rajputs (those of Rajasthan), but all Rajputs are Kshatriyas.

                    2. It is according to you that Rajasthan is the breeding place of Kshatriyas, and please will you refer to your posts above in which you stated that the Sikhs and even Shivaji have descended from the Rajasthan Rajputs. It’s horsecrap, as I said above.

                    Can you please explain what Raghuwandhis and Yadavs have to do with your argument ? None claim to be Rajputs. by the way.

                    • jagmohan singh rawat

                      dear s(stupid),i think any rajput have gave you memorable injury by physically or mentally,it may be also that you may mentally ill,so first you check up your medical fitness,there is no reply for your questions like above,no kyshtriya/rajput would less or more by your vague comments,god may cure your illness,jai bhawani

                    • S

                      @Indianrealist – What’s going on here ? Why can’t I give a reply to this idiot who says that Rajasthan was a breeding place for Rajputs who were exported to become Marathas and Sikhs ?

                    • S

                      @IR – don’t bother, the Reply button is showing up a post above, so I can reply to this idiot after all.

                      Mr. Rawat – All the questions that I asked above are perfectly answerable, but only by a Rajput of Rajasthan, which you are not. Do notice that this thread is years old, and no Rajput has actually bothered to write here. Pseudo Rajputs like yourself did jump into the argument, without trying to understand what it is all about.

                      The Rawats have a history to be proud of, take pride in your achievements instead of marrying into Rajput families and claiming yourself as one. Because you are not.

                    • jagmohan singh rawat

                      Mr s(stupid),i think you are made,you are diverting your issue of discussition , your point of discussion are now on wrong track, due to disturbed mind you lost your goal,now better for you to stop vergular comments on kyshtriya/rajput ,i think you are lion on paper,dont try to write vague/fake stories/comments about them ,i already told that you have nil knowledge about them,how can you write when you are not know your parents identity, the history of royal clan has been written and recorded by there family bhat/charan according to there status, how can you write for others who are they or not?

                    • jagmohan singh rawat

                      dear s (stupid), you are filling taste of chilli, there is not reqirement for mine to take certificate of rajput from any one ,you start your baseless questions with someone like you

  38. Anonymous

    rajputana jindabaad
    orrrrrrr ye kon fudu log uper bakwaas kr rhe hain rajputoon k baare main ………….rajputoon k khoon main pehle b garmi thi ab b hai or hameshha rehagi………..

  39. rao raheel

    Rajput is a fither

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s